The Four Cardinal Virtues

Prelimary remarks

In the last lecture we looked at the intellectual virtues and the relation of the intellectual virtues and the moral virtues. To summarize what I said, the intellectual virtues are habits of a properly functioning intellect. The intellectual virtues are necessary as a foundation for the moral virtues, but are not sufficient in themselves. Knowledge by itself is not enough for morally good action, but it is a necessary precondition.

For those of you who are writing about The Four Cardinal Virtues, the primary sources are:

Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics. This book will be easily available in the library, and there are lengthy excerpts in the Pocket Aristotle concerning the virtues. See pages 181-197, and 223-233.

Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica. This is a major work divided into several books. Thomas Aquinas discusses the moral virtues in great detail. He draws from the teachings of Aristotle and later thinkers. The moral virtues are treated in general in the Prima Secundae, which means the first part of the second part, starting from question 56. The moral virtues are treated in detail in the Secunda Secundae, which means the second part of the second part (II-II), starting from question 47. He discusses each of the cardinal virtues, the sub-virtues that are included under them, and the opposite vices. You can find the works of Aquinas in the library catalogue by searching for "Thomas Aquinas", and you will find 103 titles. There is at least one copy of the English translation of the Summa Theologica in the reference section, and many other editions and copies on the regular shelves. You will also find some works by Aquinas specifically about the virtues. Also, his commentary on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics covers the same material.
When you read the Summa Theologica, you will find that he uses dialectical method. That is, he presents the various opinions on a particular question.Each question is divided into several articles, each dealing with a particular question. He starts by presenting in detail the opposite opinions. These are the objections. Then he presents his own opinion in an orderly manner. This is the body of the article. Finally, he responds to each of the objections he presented at the beginning.

Joseph Pieper's works. The best source is "The Four Cardinal Virtues", but he also has a work called "Prudence" which is in the library.

A search for "Virtues" in the card catalogue will yield 75 hits.

One approach you might take in your papers on this subject is to write about the virtues in general, and then focus on some particular virtue.

For those of you who are writing about war and the conditions for a just war, first, consult the Higgin's Man as Man, Chapter XXXI, especially pages 542 and following. Again, you will find some material in the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. Try the following:

II-II, q. 40-42 are questions directly on war.

II-II q. 123 q. 5 deal with fortitude in situations of war.

If you are writing about the obligations and rights of employees and employers, start with Higgin's Man as Man, Chapter XXVII, especially pages 478 to 495. I also recommend the encyclical letter of John Paul II called Laborem Exercens. The footnotes in Higgins may lead you to other relevant material.

If you are writing about property, start with Higgins, Chapter XVII and XVII (pages 259-299). As for other sources, there are several in the required readings:

from the Pocket Aquinas, page 222, from the Summa Theologica II-II, q. 66. The discussion of property in Aquinas here is in the context of a question about theft.

You will also find the writings of the British Philosopher John Locke that are included in Stumpf's Elements of Philosophy, pages 192-200 deal with the question of property. John Locke's writings were very influential to the Founders of the United States of America.

A search in the library for "distributism" yielded no hits, but you can search on the Internet. It is also called "distributivism". If you cite information from the Internet, give a full citation of the URL which is the source.

There will be a test on October 19th, which is officially the mid-term test. It will be worth 10%. The test will partly be essay questions, partly some kind of multiple choice, and it will be worth 10% of your grade total. I intend to provide a thorough review in the next lecture.

The Four Cardinal Virtues in General

The term "virtue" is from Latin and originally meant "strength" or "power". It is based on the word vir - man.. The ancient Greeks, starting with Homer, praised virtue. The Greek term for virtue was arete, and the earliest writers applied it particularly to fortitude in battle, and secondarily to wisdom. Aristotle developed a whole science of the virtues, but he was not inventing the virtues, but drawing from his culture. His description of the virtues is not merely a reflection of ancient Greek culture. When we study the virtues, we are not putting ancient customs into a Petri dish, but we are drawing upon the insight of the ancient Greeks into the human condition in general. The virtues praised by the Greeks are known to all cultures. For example, you will find many of the same insights in the Old Testament, in particular the book of Proverbs and the book of Wisdom. You could find the praise of these virtues in every culture, but Aristotle is outstanding because he took a scientific look at the virtues as part of his study of human nature.

The four cardinal virtues of Prudence, Justice, Fortitude and Temperance are interconnected. This means that if you do not possess one of them, all the others are spoiled, and so you do not possess virtue at all. A few examples. A man might know what is good, know what he must do to get good results, but if he lacks temperance his decisions will be swayed by his love of pleasure. Or a man might be willing to risk his life, yet his actions are not guided by a right purpose. A bank robber who risks his life is not a prudent man, and so he is not truly a brave man.

The other point about the virtues is that in many cases we cannot say precisely where virtue lies. The right measure is very difficult to achieve, and it is often different for different individuals. The idea of "The Golden Mean" is that in our actions we must seek the right measure and proportion. Excess or defect is a departure from virtue.

Prudence in Particular

Prudence is the most important of the four cardinal virtues. The most important part of prudence is knowledge. The shortest definition of prudence is recta ratio agilbilium - right reason about things to be done. Prudence is not theoretical knowledge, such as philosophical wisdom, but practical knowledge. Prudence is not concerned only with universal and unchanging truths, but also with the singular, unique and variable things of daily life. A person can be wise when he reasons about the meaning and purpose of life, yet because of inexperience he cannot yet make good decisions in real-life situations. He must know how to apply universal principles in daily situations. A person who possesses prudence cannot easily impart to others his art of making good decisions. He cannot always even explain his own processes of thought, but after long practice he has a feeling for what he should do. When we know something in this way, it called connatural knowledge, and it is important in the moral life. For example, a child who is brought up in a certain way will understand many things about life without needing to be told. Thomas Aquinas lists many different components of prudence, but we will limit ourselves to three:

MEMORY - in order to know the meaning of the present, we must have a good memory of the past.

DOCILITY - we must remain open to reality, always willing to learn as situations change.

CLEAR-HEADED DECISIVENESS - prudence is not merely knowing what we should do, but also making the decision in a timely way.

Although we should learn basic principles of action, we cannot put in a book or code what should be done in each and every situation. There was an approach to ethics, called Casuistry that tried to do this, popular among the Jesuits. However, this approach is not useful in real situations, because it is not possible to anticipate all possible circumstances.

Justice in Particular

Justice is the virtue whereby we give to each person what is due to him, and we do this consistently, promptly and pleasurably. For a simple example, a just person wants to pay his bills on time, and he has a feeling of satisfaction when he is able to do so. Justice is the social virtue. It concerns right relations with others in society. What is just is summed up in a simple motto: cuique suum - to each his own, but it not always easy to establish what we owe to others. The simplest obligations are defined by the natural law, and that is based on the natural inclinations of each man, for example, to stay alive, to be part of society, to grow in knowledge. We have obligations therefore not to deprive others of life or health. We should not deprive others of the necessary means to stay alive, even though this may involve complex social issues. We owe the truth to others, and at least a basic minimum of friendship as members of the same society. By the same token, others owe these things to us. A further conclusion. If I have a right to life, I also have the right to use the necessary means to defend my right against an unjust aggressor. Thomas Higgins (p. 246) also mentions certain goods that we may value as much as life itself.

material goods of great value: things necessary to support life or maintain's our state in life.

personal liberty.

chastity

integrity of limb.

If there is any progress in Western Civilization, it is not in our technology, because that can be used for man or against man, and so it is morally neutral, but in increased knowledge and recognition of human rights.

Some things are owed to others not by natural right, but because of a contract. In general, it is good to keep agreements, and a person who does so is considered to be loyal and trustworthy. However, this is not always the case. I may have agreed always to stand by and support a friend, but it would be wrong to do so if by doing so I would be an accomplice in wrong-doing.

The three divisions of justice according to the parties involved are:

legal justice - what the individual owes to society as a whole. Generally speaking, these are the obligations defined by the law of the land. Exceptions would be when the law requires someone to do something that is morally wrong, in which case he must obey the higher law. Over and above the requirements of law, a citizen should also be civic-minded, willing to participate in the political process and concerned about the welfare of the community.

commutative justice - what one individual owes to another. First, he must respect the natural rights of other individuals. Second, he may have obligations that arise because of an agreement or contract. These obligations are usually clear-cut.

distributive justice - what the society owes to individuals. In some cases, this is simple. Equal protection under the law, for example. However, there are complex situations. For example, the state would have the right under certain extreme circumstances to expropriate property, in which case it must give fair compensation. If individuals or groups of individuals have been unjustly deprived of their rights, some sort of compensation is due to them, but how much and for how long is difficult to settle. The person who acts in the name of the community does not act in his own name. If he shows special favor to certain individuals or groups, he is acting unjustly, and this is called "respect of persons". For this reason, the person who is in charge of the common good must keep a certain distance and play his role. One thing that destroys justice is informality. For example, if a judge or police officer, or for that matter a professor, allows some people to address him on a first name basis, he risks subverting justice. It does not matter if such familiarity does not affect his official decisions. It can give scandal to others. An old proverb says that it is not enough for a thing to be just, it must also appear just.

There are certain situations where we have debts that we cannot possibly repay. For example, what we owe to God, to our country, to our parents and teachers. In these cases we must always remember that any actions we perform fall short. It is not possible to say to God that we have paid back what we owe, that now we are even, and likewise in the other cases. In ordinary English we do not have a single term for all of these things, but we have the word "Piety", which at one time covered all these things. Thomas Aquinas writes:

A man becomes the debtor of others according to their different excellences and the diverse benefits received from them. Now, on both counts, God holds the highest place: He is most excellent and he is the first principle of our existence and our governance. Secondarily, however, the sources of our being and governance are our parents and country; from whom, and in which, we were born and raised. And so, after God, man is most indebted to his parents and country. Hence, just as the act of showing reverence to God belongs to religion, so on a secondary level the showing of reverence to parents and country belongs to piety. Under the reverence of parents is included the respect for all blood relatives, because they are called such by virtue of their descent from the same parents. ... Under the reverence of country is understood respect for all fellow citizens and friends of one's country.
(Thomas Aquinas, On the Perfection of the Spiritual Life, ch. 13. in The Pocket Aquinas, p. 258).

Fortitude

Fortitude is synonymous with courage and bravery. It must be based on justice. The purpose of fortitude is to remove obstacles to justice. In its extreme form, it is the willingness and readiness to risk one's life for the sake of that which is just. Justice can be destroyed in two ways. First, because something pleasant draws us away from what is just, and it is the purpose of temperance to govern our desire for pleasure. In the second way, we may be unwilling to do what is just because we face some difficult obstacle. Fortitude enables us to face these difficulties for the sake of justice. A brave person still has fear. Fear is the natural reaction to anything that threatens us, and it is necessary in the face of evil. It is unreasonable to say that we can extinguish all our fears simply by positive thinking. The brave man acts in the face of his reasonable fear. While the most obvious part of fortitude is to attack evil at the risk of injury or death, the more important part is to stand firm patiently in the face of threats. Fortitude is principally in the mind, because the brave man must hold firmly to the thought of some future good when all he faces in the present is evil. He can and should harness his emotional powers to cooperate. For that reason, the brave person uses his anger in his actions in order to act or to stand firm.

In the ancient world, the Stoic philosophers praised virtue and taught that we should develop the power of our mind to face all difficulties with equanimity. They disparaged emotion, and taught that the wise man should shut out anger and other strong emotions from his soul. They even called the passions sicknesses of the soul. Immanuel Kant was following the Stoic philosophers when he said that the man who acted for the sake of happiness had a "pathological will". Aristotle and the philosophers who followed him said that the virtuous man will be angry, but that his anger must be ruled by reason. The brave man must have an intelligent anger.

The vices opposed to fortitude are cowardice as the defect, and fearlessness and recklessness are both defects. In the coward, fear overcomes his reason and prevents him from doing what he should do for the sake of justice. The fearless person is not precisely brave, because the brave person knows the risks he faces, has a respectful fear of them, and acts in the face of his fears. The reckless person rushes into battle in an untimely way, ready to risk everything even when this is not the best course.

Perserverance or standing firm is the most necessary part of fortitude, and the most common. According to the philosophers (Aristotle and Aquinas), perserverance is undermined by a soft life. The person who indulges in pleasure and always avoids discomfort will be unwilling to put up with the sadness he must experience if he is to stand firm in difficulty. For this reason, part of military training and monastic life is to do without many of the superfluous comforts of daily life. Also, there is an excess of perseverance which is a vice, and this is obstinacy. A stubborn person may "stick to his guns", but he is persevering at something even when he should yield to others.

The Virtue of Temperance

The virtue of temperance governs our appetites for pleasure. By nature we desire the pleasure that is suitable to us. Since man by definition is rational, the pleasures that are in accord with reason are suitable to man. Temperance does not restrain us from the pleasures that are reasonable, but from those that are contrary to our reason. Temperance does not act against our natural human inclinations, but works with them. Temperance is opposed to the inclinations of nature when they are like a beast that is not ruled by reason.

First and foremost, temperance governs the pleasures of the senses, and especially the sense of touch. These are the greatest and most forceful pleasures, because our sense of touch is closest to our existence, and it is also involved in reproduction, and so is concerned with the existence of offspring. The other senses are not as forceful. For example, the glutton is not motivated by the taste of food, but by the feeling of a full stomach.

The virtue of temperance also requires us to prepare ourselves. There is a place for asceticism in daily life. I've already mentioned how soft-living can undermine fortititude. Temperance requires us to train ourselves and prepare ourselves even when we are not faced with an immediate temptation. For this reason, Thomas Aquinas teaches that fasting is not merely a religious custom, but it is part of the natural law. All men are required to develop the virtue of temperance and govern their desire for pleasure by reason, and so all must take the necessary steps to prepare themselves. The purpose of fasting and other ascetical practices is not to destroy our natural inclinations, but to become master of them. He even writes that if a man would be committing a sin if he fasted to the point where he actually lost his sexual desire.

A lack of temperance undermines prudence, and if prudence is destroyed, all the virtues are undermined. Temperance itself needs to be nurtured, and this is part of the role of culture. If we are surrounded by images of self-indulgence and appeals to our senses, our reason is undermined. The mass media deliberately exploit our desires, but there is a saying: no injury is done if the other party was willing . We can select what we want to watch, and when we watch television or use the Internet, we can choose to reflect upon what we see or to surrender our judgment. A culture of temperance will be reflected in the way we speak and act as well.

While temperance primarily concerns tactile pleasures, it also concerns our emotions. Part of temperance is to control our anger. Part of temperance is to govern our sexual desire, and temperance in that department is generally called chastity. Chastity is not synonymous with celibacy, but it means governing our sexual desire in accordance with our state in life. Temperance also concerns our desire for knowledge. An uncontrolled desire is curiosity, exemplified as Ulysses who took ten years to return home because he was always seeking new adventures and experiences. The right measure is called studiosity or studiousness, which is the disciplined search for the truth. It is also possible for our natural desire for the truth to be dulled because of a life of comfort and pleasure, and then we may suffer from a dullness of the intellect for which we are morally responsible.